Mukesh Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16202 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-237 Year-2021 Thana- CHHATAUNI District- East Champaran ====================================================== MUKESH KUMAR YADAV Son of Munna Kumar Yadav Resident of village - Govindapur, P.S.- Turkauliya, District - East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhishek Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 15-11-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within three weeks. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within undertaken period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 8, 20(b)(d)(ii)(c), 23, 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, which is pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge, East Champaran, Motihari.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16202 of 2022(2) dt.15-11-2022 2/2 case. He submits that there is police has recovered 190kg of Ganja from the Scorpio vehicle. He further submits that one person was apprehended during the raid who disclosed the name of the petitioner. He submits that no incriminating article was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of this application.

Per contra, learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature, hence he does not deserve anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that petitioner is involved in the present case, I am not inclined the enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Chhatauni P.S. Case No.237 of 2021. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) ajay/- U T